The Chafee Challenge to Clinton

Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee joined the race for the Democratic presidential nomination on Wednesday, with a campaign in which he is expected to challenge front-runner Hillary Clinton on her foreign policy record.

Like that of the other challengers, Chafee’s entry into the race is welcome news in spite of the near-certainty that he isn’t going to win any primary contests. Clinton may be the prohibitive favorite, but that makes it all the more important that she be forced to answer for her record and be held to account for her serious errors in judgment. Chafee’s decision to focus on Clinton’s foreign policy record makes sense, not least since he was the sole Republican member of the Senate to vote against authorizing the Iraq war in 2002 while Clinton voted for it. Like Webb and Sanders, Chafee can legitimately call Clinton out for her vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq.

While the Iraq war offers the most obvious and significant contrast between the two, Chafee would do well to challenge Clinton on the entirety of her foreign policy record in order to show that her misjudgment on Iraq was part of a pattern of taking reliably hawkish, interventionist positions on virtually every major issue. He should force her to defend the disastrous Libyan war, and he should press her on her support for sending weapons into Syria. It should give Democratic voters pause that Clinton consistently and predictably sides with hawks in foreign policy debates, and the more challengers Clinton has to point this out to them the better-informed primary voters will be.

Hide 12 comments

12 Responses to The Chafee Challenge to Clinton

What Chaffee could bring to the entire feign policy discussion, not just the Dem primary, is worth the price of admission. Hillary has some ‘splaining to do, and most of the GOP candidates will predictably overreact but not be able to make this discussion go away since it’s not in their primary.

He can demolish her record as Secretary of State. At the moment her record as Secretary of State amounts to “I was Secretary of State”. She had ZERO accomplishments in the post and quite a few major screw-ups. The bottom line on HRC at State is that she found the Middle East in bad trouble and left it in flames. With the exception of the now-forgotten “pivot to Asia” she more or less ignored the rest of the world when she wasn’t actively antagonizing it.

Sanders had an overflow crowd at the American Indian Center in Minneapolis the other day in a state where Obama won by nearly 8 over Romney, and Rodham has been an early double digit leader over the GOP field. Even Sanders’ supporters seem surprised that his candidacy might have legs. Rep. Keith Ellison recently stopped just short of endorsing Sanders (that’s right, if Sanders has traction, Ellison would be counted on for Muslim support).

She been a beaten favorite in the past. None of the GOP, except maybe Paul, would go to the left of her on foreign policy. If her long shot Democratic challengers force her into the open, Chafee, one presumes that even at long odds, could attract some independents and Rand supporters who eventually see the GOP Establishment writing on the wall, neither of whom can stomach Sanders’ economics.

It could also break down the field – both parties – for late entries who can flex a bit, saying, “Hey, I haven’t wasted your time and money for the last 16 months. Let’s get serious.” The US may not be destined for Clinton/Bush after all.

This guy made his announcement by saying the U.S. should “go metric”. There’s a hot political topic. It’s like the man has never run for office before and didn’t think about what he would say. (How about: “I’m the Peace Candidate, Hillary is a neocon: rather a Republican convert than a neocon in Donkey’s clothing?)

I would like to see some viable challengers to Hillary Clinton. The Democratic Nomination is not her right, she should have to earn it. I don’t agree with most of what the Democrats advocate, but they deserve to have a nominee who is able to represent them and their views. I don’t see her doing that so much as advancing her own personal agenda.

If we end up in the general election next year with Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush, then something is wrong with the whole process. The Presidency is not a crown to be passed between royal families. We fought a revolution over 200 years ago against King George. Why are so anxious to install a monarchy now?

I don’t know too much about Chaffee, and I’m not predisposed to people named “Lincoln”, but this one seems honest and decent enough, for a Yankee of the troublemaking old Uplift stock. Honesty and decency could take him a long way in a popularity contest with the personally vile Clintons, but he’d best be sure his house is in order, because they’ll surely try to drown him in the Clinton trademark shower of s##t.

As someone who identifies as a Truman Liberal–I will admit that a lot about Clinton gives us pause.

A lot.

But when she’s compared to the clown car of the Republicans–she’s a no-brainer for the general…

But only if she gets there… and I am ecstatic that there are Democrats like Sanders and Chafee who are going to push her to stand for something progressive and to flesh out a position. The stuff on Libya is bad–and she deserves criticism for her role there–just like all of the Republicans who wanted to go even further..

I am not sure what qualifies for a ‘Truman Liberal’ these days: concerned for welfare of the ‘common man’, but willing to kill thousands of innocent civilians (non-Americans) to show that we (the US) are not to be challenged.
Well, I guess Hillary qualifies handily.

Nothing against Linc but the Iraq focus would have a huge winner in 2004. And what is with the metric system. Did he not live in the 1970s when they tried to brainwash us fourth graders? (Although the metric system probably is superior measurement if you think about.)